Kosovo and Montenegro are asking Germany to recognise them as being “safe countries”. They want to show that no one in their countries is persecuted or discriminated against. In Kosovo especially, this can only be laughed at. 80% of the Rroma population was ethnically cleansed away from the region.
The European Commission has announced in a recent press release that it awards seven distinguished organisations that are particularly involved in the integration of the Rroma in their countries. The winning organizations include: Roma Active Albania (RAA), which advocates the Rroma civil rights and draws attention to current topics of Romnja; the organization Citizens Association for the Promotion of Education of Roma Otaharin that is committed in Bosnia-Herzegonvina to better educational opportunities of the minority; in Kosovo The Ideas Partnership, which advocates for the integration of former beggars and promotes the enrolment of children; in Macedonia the organization Centre for Integration Ambrela that is committed to the promotion of Rroma in early childhood; in Serbia Hands of Friendship, which operates a parent-child education project; in Turkey the children’s art project Sulukule Roma Culture Development and Solidarity Association; and finally in Montenegro a project against child and forced marriages in Rroma communities, through the Centre for Roma Initiatives. The European Commission justifies its decision as follows: “We all – the European Commission, the governments, civil society organisations – need to send out the same message: Roma integration is an important policy. And it is not only investment for the benefit of this minority but it is also an investment to the benefit of society. Living in an environment in which each member of society contributes with their spirit and work force, will allow countries to grow strong and prosperous, from an economic, social and cultural perspective”, said Štefan Füle, Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, at the award ceremony.” Concerning the integration programmes of the warded organizations it must be remarked that begging Rroma or child marriages in no represent the norm among the minority.
– European Union (2014) Award for Roma Integration in the Western Balkans and Turkey. In: European Union online vom 1.10.2014. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-1064_en.htm
Keywords: Rroma, Europe, European Union, integration projects, organization, awards, stereotypes
The administrative court of Stuttgart, in what is perhaps a landmark ruling, recognized the refugee status of two Rroma from Serbia. Thus, it challenged the views of the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, which at the end of last year came to the conclusion that no persecution of Rroma could be established in Serbia and deportation was therefore justified: “As reasoning, the judges said that the Roma were experiencing extreme disadvantages in their home country and were forced to live on the margins of society, as a spokeswoman for the court said on Monday. The main reason for the judgment was the restriction of the free movement of Roma in the southeast European country. For Roma, under certain circumstances, it is punishable under Serbian law to apply for asylum in another country. This equals a persecution, the court judged.” The verdict has the character of a precedent insofar, because the Rroma are not persecuted in Serbia, according to a federal decree that will be adopted shortly. Thus, the discussion about the discrimination against Rroma in former Yugoslavia and their status as refugees is once more opened. The decision also highlights that the assessment of discrimination against a minority is far from evident and easy. While some assessment are based on the legal foundations of a country, other evaluations are based on everyday practices, such as discrimination in the labour market and the education system, that are far more difficult to prove than law-related disadvantages (see Focus online 2014/I, SWR 2014).
The federal government wants to take a completely different direction. According to the daily newspaper Neues Deutschland (2014) the government wants declare Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as safe countries of origin. German interior minister Thomas de Maizière stated that Cabinet would discuss the bill on April the 30th. De Maizière had previously proposed, to also take Albania and Montenegro onto the list of safe countries of origin, but this proposal failed because of the criticism of the SPD: “SPD and the Union had approved in the coalition agreement, to take the three states of Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina onto the list. Asylum applications from people from these Balkan countries can then be processed faster – and are usually rejected. […] De Maizière said that Serbia had candidate status as a member state of the European Union. Albania and Bosnia-Herzegovina went for it. “From these states one must expect that they deal well with their own citizens”, de Maizière said.” This contrasts with a perspective that emphasizes the individual destinies of those affected. For the German Institute for Human Rights, the concept of safe countries of origin is problematic in itself, because it greatly complicates the presentation and verification of individual persecutions (compare Focus online 2014/II).
On the occasion of the international Rroma Day, the chairman of the European Rroma Rights Centre, Robert Kushen, reflects on the situation of the Rroma in Europe and the continuing challenges for this minority (Kushen 2014). He arrives at a sober view: the decade of Rroma inclusion, which was adopted in Sofia in 2005, and encompassed the countries of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain, unfortunately cannot fulfil the expectations that it raised. Rroma are still affected by widespread poverty, discrimination, unemployment and insufficient access to public institutions such as schools and hospitals: “Despite this political recognition of an unconscionable social crisis, Roma remain among the poorest, unhealthiest, least educated and most marginalised European citizens. The data are devastating: Across Central and Southeast Europe, 90 percent of Roma live in poverty. Fewer than one third of adults have paid employment. Only 15 percent of young Roma have completed secondary or vocational school. Nearly 45 percent of Roma live in housing that lacks basic amenities. Life expectancy in Roma communities is 10-15 years less than in non-Roma communities, with many Roma lacking access to insurance and health care.” Kushen refers in his judgement to information from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 2013). Reasoning with such figures is not without dangers, since the representation of the Rroma as uneducated, poor, and unhealthy is often interpreted by the polemical, public discourse as a cultural peculiarity of the minority, although these characteristics are inevitably a poverty phenomenon. Although is not to deny that numerous Rroma are poor and uneducated, the relevant question is whether such an argument can contribute to the integration of the Rroma. In addition, surveys often only take into account the visible Rroma, because the integrated ones are hard to identify as Roma and difficult to contact. Not only images of misery are needed, which generate compassion, but also images of success that allow a positive identification.
Kushen continues with information about the marginalization of the Rroma in Italy, France, Sweden and Hungary, and then gets on to the latest report from the European Union on the situation of the Rroma. The report published on April the second this year, can not present success stories either: “In early April, the European Commission convened a “Roma Summit” and issued a report assessing how member states are doing in addressing the interconnected problems of poverty and discrimination which the Roma are facing. The report noted “the persistence of segregation” in education, a large and in some cases widening employment gap between Roma and non-Roma, big differences between Roma and non-Roma in health insurance coverage, and an “absence of progress” in addressing the need for housing. Finally, the report noted that discrimination remains “widespread” (compare European Commission 2014).
The Welt (2013) reports currently on practices against migrant Rroma in Hamburg. The responsible Minister of the Interior Michael Neumann wants to continue the deportations of asylum seekers from South Eastern Europe, despite the massive criticism from Greens, the Left and the FDP. This does not mean, according to the Interior Minister that the deportations were not individually critically examined. Again, one must be amazed that migrants from Southeast Europe are held from the outset for Rroma, although this fact is not recorded in the statistics. Many immigrants from the Balkans are members of other ethnic groups. However, it is true that Rroma are particularly affected by exclusion. Radio Dreyeckland (2013) rightly criticised that the protection rate of asylum applications from Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Bosnia-Hercegovina fixed at 5% is too low. Many Rroma in these countries are discriminated against and should not therefore be treated as pure poverty refugees. This is also criticized by Jelpke (2013): The asylum applications of immigrants from the Western Balkans are being processed in shorter and shorter periods. This is due to the coalition agreement between the CDU and the SPD. This document plans to declare the western countries of South Eastern Europe to be “safe countries”. This makes it increasingly difficult for migrants from these countries to get a successful asylum application. A protective claim is still just awarded 0.1 to 0.6 percent of applicants from Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The federal states of Schleswig-Holstein, Bremen and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, meanwhile decided a deportation moratorium for the winter months (Carini 2013).
Haug (2013), in his article, points to the discrepancy between integration efforts communicated by the State and the real experienced exclusion. Rroma deported to Serbia mostly find there an income on the edge of society or live on welfare. Against the official statement of Serbia, that Rroma are not persecuted in the country stand in contrast to the misery and hopelessness: “Where it can be, they are marginalized, the victims reported. You get no jobs and are not informed of your rights. Even for food the meagre money barely suffice. […] “On paper, there are now many measures to end discrimination against these people,” says the lawyer. The trip did however convinced him that: “In daily life the affected ones feel little of it””
The President of the German Association of Cities Ulrich Maly goes against simple explanations in connection with immigrants from Southeast Europe. The migrants are often discriminated against and are hoping for a better life in Germany. He appealed to the historical responsibility of Germany in dealing with minorities and argued against a policy of isolation, as demanded by several parties. Rather, one must promote the integration in Germany and in the countries of origin: “These are not people who come and go with open hands to the administration. They come for other reasons. Because they are oppressed at home, perhaps even feel persecuted. They come because they believe that they will find a better life with us. These are reasons that one initially must respect.” Maly therefore goes against an alliance of politicians and citizens fearing a “social tourism” on the German social welfare system from the beginning of 2014. Bulgarians and Romanians will then be able to search unrestricted fro work in the European Union, thanks to the European free Movement Agreement (Kusicke 2013).
Leber (2013) sees the debate about immigration marked by varying degrees of coverage in social systems. The “general principle of European free movement” meets various forms of social welfare. That, however, this is not necessarily a contradiction in a polemical debate, however, it is often forgotten. Instead, it is dominated by a politics of fear, which flattens the heterogeneity of migration phenomena and propagandises the immigration of unskilled problem cases. It is this utilitarian thinking is criticized by Koch (2013) in his account of the problem. It means a ranking of people on questionable, inhuman principles.
Deutsch 
English (UK) 
Français